Background “Complete Extrapolation” of efficacy from adult or other pediatric data, to the pediatric population, is an important scientific tool that reduces the need for pediatric efficacy trials. Dose finding and safety studies in pediatrics are still needed. “No Extrapolation” requires 2 pediatric efficacy trials. “Partial Extrapolation” eliminates the need to conduct 2 pediatric efficacy trials; 1 efficacy or exposure/response study may be sufficient. We examined pediatric extrapolation from 2009 to 2014 evaluating any changes in extrapolation assumptions and the causes for these changes since a prior analysis published in 2011. Methods We reviewed all 157 products with 388 pediatric studies submitted to the FDA from 2009 through 2014. We assessed whether efficacy was extrapolated from adult or other pediatric data and categorized extrapolation as Complete, Partial, or No, and identified the reasons for the changes. Results Partial extrapolation decreased, whereas use of No and Complete extrapolation noticeably increased. Complete, Partial, or No extrapolations changed from 14%, 68%, and 18% in the 2011 study to 34%, 29%, and 37% respectively in the current study. The changes were mostly due to a better understanding of pediatric pathophysiology, why trials have failed, and improved endpoints. Conclusions Evolving science and data obtained from clinical trials increases the certainty of extrapolation assumptions and drives decisions to utilize extrapolation. Lessons learned from the conduct of these trials are critical to improving evidence-based medicine. Extrapolation of Efficacy is a powerful scientific tool that streamlines pediatric product development. Increased knowledge and evolving science inform utilization of this tool.
Pediatric legislation in the US and the EU is driving pediatric product development on an international scale. To facilitate harmonization and global development of pediatric medicines, it is important to understand the legislative requirements that must be met along with incentives that exist in the US and the EU to include pediatric patients in therapeutic clinical trials. Although there are many similarities, differences exist. This review is an effort to enhance understanding of the pediatric legislation in both regions. It is intended as an overview to supplement the region-specific legislation and guidance documents that are available on the websites of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Despite differences, the goal of the legislation in both the EU and the US is to incentivize and require timely, ethical, and sound scientific development of pharmaceutical products for the pediatric population and to provide information for their safe and effective use.
OBJECTIVES To conduct a systematic review and analysis of trial data submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to identify possible causes for the failure of pediatric trials of triptans for treatment of migraines. DATA SOURCE The FDA website for drug information and published literature. STUDY SELECTION All pediatric efficacy and pharmacokinetics trial data of drugs used for abortive treatment of migraine submitted to the FDA from January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2011. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Patient demographic baseline characteristics, inclusion and exclusion criteria, trial designs, efficacy end points, and pharmacokinetic profiles were analyzed and compared across drug products. RESULTS We analyzed data for sumatriptan succinate nasal spray and zolmitriptan, eletriptan hydrobromide, almotriptan malate, and rizatriptan benzoate tablets. Seven efficacy trials had a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial design. In 4 trials, patients were required to have a history of migraine attacks lasting at least 4 hours. High response rates for placebo were observed in all trials, with pain relief at 2 hours ranging from 53% to 57.5%. Nonrandomization of patients with an early placebo response design was used in the rizatriptan trial in 2011. Compared with the rizatriptan trial conducted in 1999, the 2011 rizatriptan trial reduced the placebo response rate by 6% for headache freedom at the 2-hour posttreatment end point owing to study design. The pharmacokinetic profiles between adolescents and adults were statistically similar. CONCLUSIONS High placebo response rates are consistent across all trials and may represent the principal challenge in pediatric trials of drugs for abortive treatment of migraine. Enrichment with selection of subjects with long-lasting migraine attacks is not sufficient to overcome high placebo response rates. Another enrichment strategy, the nonrandomization of patients with an early placebo response, successfully reduces the high placebo response rate for rizatriptan and is a trial design that should be considered for future pediatric trials of abortive migraine therapeutics.
IMPORTANCE The increasing prevalence of pediatric chronic disease has resulted in increased exposure to long-term drug therapy in children. The duration of recently completed drug trials that support approval for drug therapy in children with chronic diseases has not been systematically evaluated. Such information is a vital first step in forming safety pharmacovigilance strategies for drugs used for long-term therapy in children. OBJECTIVE To characterize the duration of clinical trials submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for pediatric drug approvals, with a focus on drugs used for long-term therapy. DESIGN AND SETTING A review was performed of all safety and efficacy clinical trials conducted under the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act or the Pediatric Review Equity Act and submitted to the FDA from September 1, 2007, to December 31, 2014, to support the approval of drugs frequently used for long-term therapy in children. Statistical analysis was performed from July 1, 2015, to December 31, 2017. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Maximum duration of trials submitted to support FDA approval of drugs for children. RESULTS A total of 306 trials supporting 86 drugs intended for long-term use in children were eligible for the primary analysis. The drugs most commonly evaluated were for treatment of neurologic (25 [29%]), pulmonary (16 [19%]), and anti-infective (14 [16%]) indications. The median maximum trial duration by drug was 44 weeks (minimum, 1.1 week; maximum, 364 weeks). For nearly two-thirds of the drugs (52 [61%]), the maximum trial duration was less than 52 weeks. For 10 of the drugs (12%), the maximum trial duration was 3 years or more. Maximum duration of trials did not vary by therapeutic category, minimum age of enrollment, calendar year, or legislative mandate. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Pediatric clinical trials designed to sufficiently investigate drug safety and efficacy to support FDA approval are of relatively limited duration. Given the potential long-term exposure of patients to these drugs, the clinical community should consider whether new approaches are needed to better understand the safety associated with long-term use of these drugs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.